Received-SPF: pass (google.com: domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 2620:137:e000::1:20 as permitted sender) client-ip=2620:137:e000::1:20;
Date:   Tue, 18 Oct 2022 12:55:15 +0300
From:   Vladimir Oltean <olteanv@gmail.com>
To:     Arun.Ramadoss@microchip.com
Cc:     andrew@lunn.ch, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
        UNGLinuxDriver@microchip.com, vivien.didelot@gmail.com,
        linux@armlinux.org.uk, Tristram.Ha@microchip.com,
        f.fainelli@gmail.com, kuba@kernel.org, edumazet@google.com,
        pabeni@redhat.com, richardcochran@gmail.com,
        netdev@vger.kernel.org, Woojung.Huh@microchip.com,
        davem@davemloft.net
Subject: Re: [RFC Patch net-next 0/6] net: dsa: microchip: add gPTP support
 for LAN937x switch
Message-ID: <20221018095515.tnhqjlyvu3dmtn3q@skbuf>
References: <20221014152857.32645-1-arun.ramadoss@microchip.com>
 <20221017184649.meh7snyhvuepan25@skbuf>
 <ce76fa72ad1dd9d4f86a0bdcbd2ae473e2f29262.camel@microchip.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <ce76fa72ad1dd9d4f86a0bdcbd2ae473e2f29262.camel@microchip.com>
Precedence: bulk

On Tue, Oct 18, 2022 at 06:29:17AM +0000, Arun.Ramadoss@microchip.com wrote:
> > On Fri, Oct 14, 2022 at 08:58:51PM +0530, Arun Ramadoss wrote:
> > > The LAN937x switch has capable for supporting IEEE 1588 PTP protocol. This
> > > patch series add gPTP profile support and tested using the ptp4l application.
> > > LAN937x has the same PTP register set similar to KSZ9563, hence the
> > > implementation has been made common for the ksz switches. But the testing is
> > > done only for lan937x switch.
> > 
> > Unrelated to the proposed implementation. What user space stack do you
> > use for gPTP bridging?
> 
> I had used LinuxPTP stack for testing this patch set and in specific
> linuxptp/configs/gptp.cfg 
> 
> Test Setup is of
> LAN9370 DUT1 <LAN1> --- LAN9370 DUT2 <LAN1>
> 
> Ran the below command in both DUTS
> #ptp4l -f ~/linuxptp/configs/gptp.cfg -i lan1

gPTP bridges are when you specify "-i" more than once, similar to how
1588 boundary clocks are created in ptp4l. Linuxptp does not support
gPTP bridges; the time information needs to be relayed differently
compared to both a BC and a TC, and there is also a Follow_Up information
TLV which needs to be updated.

So I guess the answer is, you don't test gPTP bridging, ok.